I have been reading Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries. On p 138-139 it states
As already mentioned, some scholars find it unthinkable that Paul could have circumcised Timothy. Referring to 1 Cor 7:17–20 Haenchen claims that this text “shows that Paul wanted nothing to do with the supplementary circumcision of a Christian.” The crucial point in the text mentioned is the following statement: “Was anyone at the time of his call uncircumcised? Let him not seek circumcision” (1 Cor 7:18b). This cannot, however, be used as an argument against the historicity of Timothy’s circumcision. The words rendered “uncircumcised”—in Greek ἐν ἀκροβυστία—literally means “with a foreskin” and is [p 139] used as a name for the Gentiles (m. Ned. 4:11). But Timothy was a Jew—and was treated as such.
Reidar Hvalvik, “Paul as a Jewish Believer—According to the Book of Acts,” in Jewish Believers in Jesus: The Early Centuries, ed. Oskar Skarsaune (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2007), 138–139.
The problem is that in Neusner, Jacob. The Mishnah : A New Translation. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1988 there is no Nedarim 4.11. I'm wondering whether the error is in Hvalvik or whether he is citing a different version of the Mishnah.
